FERC Filings

EPSA Comments on the Feb. 4 Reposne of the PJM Interconnection to the FERC Deficiency Notice

Comments

PJM's February 4 Filing explains that the Market Monitor analyzed "the presence of more than three jointly pivotal suppliers" and concluded that the "three jointly pivotal supplier test was deemed to provide adequate certainty that the defined local market would be competitive." The Commission’s January 25 Order expressed concern that the three pivotal suppliers test "may be too restrictive and will impose mitigation even in markets that are workably competitive” and instituted a Section 206 investigation. PJM’s February 4 Filing, however, ignores the Section 206 investigation instituted by the Commission.

The test that PJM applies in Docket Nos. ER04 539-000, et al. to determine the comprehensiveness of the market should be the same test ultimately approved by the Commission to evaluate competitiveness in Docket No. EL03 236-000, et al. Thus, EPSA maintains that the outcome of the Section 206 investigation in Docket Nos. EL03-236-001, et al. regarding the justness and reasonableness of the no-three pivotal suppliers test should be applied to the Commission's analysis of the February 4 Filing to determine whether certain constraints should be exempted from offer capping. Therefore, EPSA requests that the Commission clarify that the result of the Section 206 investigation will be taken into account and used by the Commission in its ruling on the February 4 Filing.

• View Previous Section
• View Next Section
• Back to Issue Menu